‘New possibilities for diversifying collection and judgement of evidence. Smart technologies allow online, anytime, anywhere and on demand assessment’ (Murgatroyd 2018) This quote from a School News article by CORE Education in June 24, 2019 “how Reliable is a 6-monthly report by the time it gets home” highlights an ongoing issue in schools today In 2007 or thereabouts the New Zealand Curriculum was updated after a lot of consultation with relevant stakeholders giving schools more freedom in relation as to how curriculum was to be delivered and reported upon. Before this could gai traction National standards were introduces and school were forced to confirm to the rules even though there was a lot of confusion and concern about the relevance of the data being collected. About the only useful aspect of National Standards was the Data was collected and school shad to develop systems for the collection and analysis of the data. Unfortunately, there was little consistency across the system therefore not much was achieved. Fear of reprisal in the form of ERP revies and LSM interventions kept most schools on track and a lot of time and effort and expense went into the creation of reporting systems. It created an extra level of have and have not schools especially when the media and the ministry produce league tables and schools advertised their results as being better than their neighbouring schools. During the later years of national l standards technological advances and the fact that the ‘one size doesn’t fit all needs’ meant a number of different applications were produced that enabled school to communicate in an online environment with their students and whanau. Applications such as Google Classroom. Microsoft 365, Blogger, Seesaw, Class dojo and a number of school management systems have developed sufficiently in order to be able to be easily used to allow real time reporting. The issues with the current system of twice a year reports are as follows: 1. It is a historic practise coming from a pen and paper regime and in a digital world outdated though still favoured by an influential section of the community who still see education through the lens of their own experience many years past. 2. It has a narrow focus mainly on the there cire curricular subjects with a passing mention of the key competences which though useful are not consistent across the education network so not relevant as a meaningful assessment tool. 3. They provided limited feedback as they are normally sent out at the end of a term and at the end of the year which is often too late for any meaningful dialogue 4. Added to this is the ability to cut and paste comments across a number of ‘similar ‘student in school management systems which makes their more generic that individualised. 5. Often interventions or Individual Education plans are not mentioned in these types of reports. Under national standards schools were forced to rank children as above at below and well below which was not useful for any child self-esteem or desire to learn. 6. The use of age reporting and three-way interviews was tried and while reasonably successful was still in a pen or paper format and focussed on achievement against benchmarks. This was only used for children in Year 1-3 and the issue of children whose birthdays fell in Dec-Feb made it a bit problematic. My new place of employment has a similar issue. It is a one-day school for gifted and talented children from 25 local schools. At present we use the New Zealand Centre of Gifted education (NZCGE) programme https://nzcge.co.nz/about%20us/nzcge%20curriculum?src=nav Which highlights the contents strands of personal, conceptual and talent development. The staff have designed rubrics to track progress but have found reporting to host schools and whanau a difficult proposition due to the following: • Report nor really understood or relevant to host school teachers or whanau • Only asked for originally in response to an ERO review at a contributing school – more a tick box compliance task. • Enrich@ILT staff currently post work on Facebook which is useful but hit and miss in regards who sees it and who doesn’t. • with children only here one day a week there is also the issue of over reporting or how much is relevant or useful. My aim is to introduce a real time reporting system such as seesaw or class dojo this term as a way to provide • up to date digital reporting including multimedia evidence to schools and whanau • a system enabling children to upload their own work to their portal • the ability for call teachers or whanau to provide instant feedback on children work. This has the potential to strengthen the link between classroom and Enrich@ILT which can be seen as an inconvenience for some class teachers. Also, the children who produce outstanding work now have a platform to share their work with their peers and whanau.